I have gathered from your previous posts that this is your opinion, Jeff. But I don't think that's quite what you said in this post.

Insurance is a pretty clear-cut concept. You believe that health care should not be insured, but funded by some other mechanism entirely. Fair enough. But what you said sounded more like, "Well, I don't accept your [ie Cal's] definition of insurance," which leaves open the notion that his definition is itself subjective and that your disagreement with him lies in how you define insurance. The definition of insurance not subjective. What IS subjective is whether insurance, as objectively defined, applies to the health system at all. You can legitimately argue that it shouldn't but then you need to say exactly that.

Fair enough. My original overly sarcastic response was framed far too sloppily; and my supposedly clarifying response to Twin didn't really clear it up as well it it should have.